About your Search

20130115
20130123
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)
to surrender on the debt limit and require the republicans to accept new taxes in exchange for any new real spending reductions. so the white house's plan is to force republicans to be unreasonable by being themselves reasonable and taking the positions they have had all along, including in the 2012 campaign, which they won. another version came today from "the new york times" columnist, saying they could adopt the strategy, called kill the wounded, the wounded being the republican party. the way the strategy works, the moderate policies on gun control and hurricane relief, they will force the republicans to offend main stream supporters or risk a challenge from the right. there is a kind of a delightful logic to this argument, which it is true. the republican party looks really bad because the white house is proposing pretty popular moderate ideas and republicans keep saying no to them. and yeah, it is true that house republicans look kind of crazy when they say they're going to let the white house default on its obligations, regarding the election and that issue. so yeah, if obama was not
are protected by armed guards at their schools. mr. obama demands the wealthy pay their fair share of taxes, but he is just another elitest hypocrite when it comes to protection for their kids. >> the nra suffered a big loss in new york today with governor andrew cuomo signing into law the toughest gun control legislation in the country, strengthening the state's existing assault weapons ban. >> going to put rules in place that actually protect innocent people in society. that is what the state of new york is doing today. and it says common sense can win. and good people can win. and you can actually get government to work and get good things to happen. you can overpower the extremists with intelligence and with reason and with common sense. >> the nra immediately released this statement. these gun control schemes have failed in the past and will have no impact on public safety and crime, sadly, the new york legislature gave no consideration to that reality while lawmakers could have taken a step towards strengthening mental health reporting. instead, they opted for stopping the rights of g
, and raised taxes more than once. and reagan was in favor of a ban on assault weapons just like president obama. >> right, and that comment was a way of saying that these are very centrist reforms, really common sense things that most americans agree with. he emphasized that in a few ways and a few times during that time. and i think the framing you're talking about, too, is really important. it is not just guns they're looking at. they're looking at mental health and research, links between violent media. you know, they are looking at more armed school resource officers at schools and providing funding for that. but i think constantly framing it, these are things that just make sense that the majority of americans support. and how can the republicans be so intransigent, not be even willing to discuss or consider any of these measures. >> richard, a month ago we heard the pundits say hand it off to joe biden and you will be involved in a senate committee process and lose all the momentum. well, this president/joe biden team, in the meantime, solved the fiscal cliff situation. joe biden re
than tax cuts for the rich. they have to understand that they want government to do things like help the hurricane victims which most voted against in the case of sandy. they need more moderate people to vote in the republican primaries.
it the curb. and many thought president obama wanted to go over in order to raise taxes. to do the same thing over the debt ceiling and get full blame for it, it could genuinely destroy the republican party, of course while destroying the economy. >> there is that little problem, for republicans. so what about this point, ezra, that the president, the federal government could easily meet its obligations on actual debt payments through bonds and that sort of thing. but it would be the spending, the discretionary spending that they would have to cut under these circumstances. so there wouldn't ever be, many republicans insist they wouldn't ever be a realistic prospect of default in this. and that is why the president uses the word "obligations," instead of the word debt because they may just agree with them that there wouldn't actually be a debt default. >> it is unclear, we literally don't know what would happen because it never happened bef e before. so a legal authority is not all obvious. so there is a question, for the treasury department, to decide if we pay off the bond holders, but not
Search Results 0 to 13 of about 14 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)